<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (9) TMI 205 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75582</link>
    <description>Bona fide doubt on service tax liability and payment of tax and interest constituted reasonable cause, so Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 barred penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78. The Tribunal found that the assessee had entertained a genuine belief about taxability and that the facts did not support suppression or wilful default. Penalty provisions were therefore not attracted, and the assessee was relieved from penal consequences.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2026 15:20:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113846" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 205 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75582</link>
      <description>Bona fide doubt on service tax liability and payment of tax and interest constituted reasonable cause, so Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 barred penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78. The Tribunal found that the assessee had entertained a genuine belief about taxability and that the facts did not support suppression or wilful default. Penalty provisions were therefore not attracted, and the assessee was relieved from penal consequences.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75582</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>